Investigation of the Efficacy of Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation Versus Irrigation with Reciprocating Activation: An Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopic Study

Kato, Augusto Shoji; Cunha, Rodrigo Sanches; Bueno, Carlos Eduardo da Silveira; Pelegrine, Rina Andréa; Fontana, Carlos Eduardo; Martin, Alexandre Sigrist De

doi:10.1016/j.joen.2016.01.016

Cited by 89 publications

(124 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors of that study observed that ultrasonic agitation yielded the best results for the total area of the canal walls and the apical root third. However, Kato et al (24) found that EC was better than PUI in SL removal from more-apical regions of root canals. This discrepancy may be due to differences in study methods, such as root canal treatment method, SEM evaluation, and SL analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This discrepancy may be due to differences in study methods, such as root canal treatment method, SEM evaluation, and SL analysis. After root canal preparation, Kato et al (24) embedded specimens in flasks containing heavybody silicone, cleaved the samples longitudinally, and prepared six indentations in the apical region. The authors reported that use of this flask system with elastic material permitted them to reassemble the two longitudinal halves of each cleaved specimen and reuse these samples, as it avoided irrigant extrusion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These effects are possible because the Easy Clean is made of an acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS) plastic that reduces or even prevents damage during contact with root canal walls and increases instrument flexibility (24). According to the manufacturer, Easy Clean has a size of 25 and a 0.04 taper and was developed for use mainly after root canal preparation, in reciprocating motion.…”

Section: Originalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the manufacturer, Easy Clean has a size of 25 and a 0.04 taper and was developed for use mainly after root canal preparation, in reciprocating motion. This reciprocating cinematic represent a 180º clockwise turn, followed by a 90º counterclockwise turn, possibly avoiding file fracture or locking within root canals (24). The Easy Clean system is less expensive than sonic and ultrasonic equipment.…”

Section: Originalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Effects of auxiliary device use on smear layer removal

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluated the effects of different auxiliary irrigation devices on smear layer removal with a chelating solution (QMix). Fifty single-rooted permanent human teeth were shaped with a sequence of nickel-titanium instruments. A 2% chlorhexidine gel was used as a chemical auxiliary substance during preparation. Samples were assigned to five groups (n = 10 each) according to final irrigation protocol, namely, distilled water (control group), QMix 1 min, QMix + passive ultrasonic irrigation (PUI), QMix + plastic endodontic finishing file (EC), and QMix 3 min. Teeth were prepared and evaluated by scanning electron microscopy, and three photomicrographs (magnification, 1,000×) were obtained for each root third. Two blinded and precalibrated evaluators analyzed and scored the images, and the data were statistically analyzed by the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests (P < 0.05). Groups were ranked according to the extent of smear layer removal. The total area of the root canal walls and apical root thirds was calculated, and the groups ranked PUI > EC = QMix 3 min > QMix 1 min > control. QMix 1 min was effective for smear layer removal only when used with auxiliary devices, and QMix + passive ultrasonic irrigation yielded the best results, particularly for the apical third. (J Oral Sci 58, 561-567, 2016)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Originalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Originalmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of auxiliary device use on smear layer removal

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this reason, it produces high topographic contrast and images with high resolution. However, despite the high contrast produced, some details of the sample may not be detected due to the metallization process, compromising the analysis of important features of root canal morphology (22)(23)(24)(25). Therefore, the authors decided to use the ESEM equipment for apical portion analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Filling Material Removal with Reciprocating and Rotary Systems Associated with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation

Gomes¹,

Carvalho²,

Júnior³

et al. 2017

Eur Endod J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluation of chemical and morphological changes in radicular dentin after different final surface treatments

Lopes

Roperto

Akkus

et al. 2018

Microscopy Res & Technique

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the chemical and morphological effects of different lasers as a final surface treatment for endodontic therapy through energy dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDS) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) respectively. Twenty‐five maxillary canines were selected and instrumented with K3 system. Roots were randomly distributed into five groups (n = 5) according to the surface treatment: GI (distilled water), GII (NaOCl + EDTA), GIII (NaOCl + EDTA + 980 nm diode laser), GIV (NaOCl + EDTA+ 1,064 nm Nd:YAG laser), and GV (NaOCl + EDTA+ 2,780 nm Er, Cr:YSGG laser). Lasers were applied for 20 s and samples were bisected, exposing the treated surface and then subjected to elements quantification by EDS and morphological evaluation by scanning electron microscope (SEM). EDS data were submitted to ANOVA‐two way, and SEM scores were submitted to two‐way Kruskal–Wallis and Dunn's tests. The EDS analysis showed no difference for the chemical elements and Ca/P ratio between groups (p > .05). Statistical analysis showed more intense results for GV and less intense results for GI (p < .05). The GIII showed an amorphous organic matrix surface, while GV provided greater removal of intertubular dentin forming craters, and GIV promoted dentin fusion. The EDS method used in this study was not able to verify any chemical changes in root canal dentin; Nd:YAG, Er, Cr:YSGG, and 980 nm diode laser were capable of modifying the dentin morphology, correlating characteristics features for each one, which are essential clinical knowledge to establish the correct indication for each case. Research Highlights EDS was not able to verify any chemical changes in root canal dentin after 980 nm diode, Nd:YAG and Er;Cr:YSGG laser treatments Nd:YAG, Er, Cr:YSGG, and 980 nm diode laser modified dentin morphology, correlating characteristics features for each one.

show abstract

Investigation of the Efficacy of Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation Versus Irrigation with Reciprocating Activation: An Environmental Scanning Electron Microscopic Study

Cited by 89 publications

References 31 publications

Effects of auxiliary device use on smear layer removal

Effects of auxiliary device use on smear layer removal

Filling Material Removal with Reciprocating and Rotary Systems Associated with Passive Ultrasonic Irrigation

Evaluation of chemical and morphological changes in radicular dentin after different final surface treatments

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About